Dave's two copper at first
I scanned the new system - didn't do as thorough a reading as Rob. And yeah, Rob, the AU system is different, and seems . . . well, different. Spells at a given level, and then casting them as weakened or heightened (I think they use different words) a level lower or higher, for different effects. Not as much healing, but the same kind of hp thing, which didn't seem good. Significantly different classes, but it didn't seem like it'd be better - just different.
Anyway. The first thing I noticed was sometimes you need to roll low. I like the 3E high-is-always-good way, because big numbers are better. Or at least it's simpler - the example you gave, I think, was breaking down a door with a +4 modifier - right there, if the modifier is +4, it should RAISE the target number, not lower it. You know what I mean?
Now, the problem with that is as stats go higher, you want to roll UNDER them, if you're tying stuff to stats. But I've seen complications with math kill games before - and there are bonuses for high stats, right? Just keep it at that, maybe? The door doesn't give a modifier, but the door has an innate target number, and the PLAYER'S bonuses affect that. It feels more standardized, too - or it does to me.
Low hp is a problem, maybe, and the changes to armor I'd want to play-test a bunch before knowing how it works. If I was playing, I'd want to continue to get hp as I levelled - and I see the higher levels cap out and stop giving added hp. With this system, for instance, it's more likely that a bunch of low level scrubs with lucky rolls can drop a high-level guy. I'm not sure that's a BAD thing, really, but maybe cut back on the combat-focus. Or not? I dunno. Seems like it'd be difficult to role-play, 'cuz I'd be maxxing out my combat skills to stay alive.
The system seems REALLY heavy into abilities for skills - the target number to hit a guy is tied to one of his stats. If you're doing that - and it seems okay, at first blush - I wouldn't do random rolls. Maybe a few point-buy systems as a suggestion for new players, like 3E PH/DMG does?
I second what Rob said on a lot of points - it's really combat heavy. Me, I like playability over realism - ask me sometime about the system I tested where one bar fight took TEN HOURS of real-time to resolve. And the dex stat - or whatever it's called - doesn't modify missile combat? That seemed weird. Actually, I like 3E how there's not one chart for each stat, and different modifiers for different things, but any stat at this level gives this bonus across the board. But I like streamlining, and maybe this is more for old-school gamers.
Every system I've seen or used for a skill-point D&D system eventually removes tying skill-points to a stat - or at least, cuts it WAY back. They seem like parallel processes, stats and skills, and having stats give BONUSES to a particular skill instead of one stat giving bonus skill points makes better sense, maybe.
Yeah - who's the target audience?
Why only four stats?
Like I said, first time through, and not very deep. It seems solid, in general, and a lot of my comments were more about MY preferences in a game system. I'll try to roll some barbarians and see how combat works - see if I can break anything.
Anyway. The first thing I noticed was sometimes you need to roll low. I like the 3E high-is-always-good way, because big numbers are better. Or at least it's simpler - the example you gave, I think, was breaking down a door with a +4 modifier - right there, if the modifier is +4, it should RAISE the target number, not lower it. You know what I mean?
Now, the problem with that is as stats go higher, you want to roll UNDER them, if you're tying stuff to stats. But I've seen complications with math kill games before - and there are bonuses for high stats, right? Just keep it at that, maybe? The door doesn't give a modifier, but the door has an innate target number, and the PLAYER'S bonuses affect that. It feels more standardized, too - or it does to me.
Low hp is a problem, maybe, and the changes to armor I'd want to play-test a bunch before knowing how it works. If I was playing, I'd want to continue to get hp as I levelled - and I see the higher levels cap out and stop giving added hp. With this system, for instance, it's more likely that a bunch of low level scrubs with lucky rolls can drop a high-level guy. I'm not sure that's a BAD thing, really, but maybe cut back on the combat-focus. Or not? I dunno. Seems like it'd be difficult to role-play, 'cuz I'd be maxxing out my combat skills to stay alive.
The system seems REALLY heavy into abilities for skills - the target number to hit a guy is tied to one of his stats. If you're doing that - and it seems okay, at first blush - I wouldn't do random rolls. Maybe a few point-buy systems as a suggestion for new players, like 3E PH/DMG does?
I second what Rob said on a lot of points - it's really combat heavy. Me, I like playability over realism - ask me sometime about the system I tested where one bar fight took TEN HOURS of real-time to resolve. And the dex stat - or whatever it's called - doesn't modify missile combat? That seemed weird. Actually, I like 3E how there's not one chart for each stat, and different modifiers for different things, but any stat at this level gives this bonus across the board. But I like streamlining, and maybe this is more for old-school gamers.
Every system I've seen or used for a skill-point D&D system eventually removes tying skill-points to a stat - or at least, cuts it WAY back. They seem like parallel processes, stats and skills, and having stats give BONUSES to a particular skill instead of one stat giving bonus skill points makes better sense, maybe.
Yeah - who's the target audience?
Why only four stats?
Like I said, first time through, and not very deep. It seems solid, in general, and a lot of my comments were more about MY preferences in a game system. I'll try to roll some barbarians and see how combat works - see if I can break anything.
posted by Dave @ 1:53 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home